Economies have both qualitative and quantitative aspects. Socialists focus solely the latter. They focus on the reallocation of resources, while ignoring the creativeness that led to the existence of such resources in the first place.
This was Marx’s error. Like the Mercantilists he posited finite resources, which meant that as competition led to increasing concentrations of wealth, the number of people with money would constantly decrease until almost all resources were held by almost no one, at which point revolution was “inevitable”.
Practically, though–and to the frank disappointment of many intellectuals who derived the meaning in their lives from the contemplation of participating in mass violence–Capitalism does NOT lead to anything but increasing wealth across the board.
This wealth is made possible by the non-material, qualitative factors of creativity, and industriousness in the pursuit of new creation.
I will add that socialism is to society what Marx claimed Capitalism was with respect to the environment: a coercive, abusive force backed ideologically by a narrative justifying such hegemonic pretensions.
I say this often, but one paradigmatic difference between Fascism and Communism is that the former looks out for worlds to conquer, whereas the latter looks first INSIDE, making the civil war the paradigmatic Communist war, only followed upon completion by what we would normally view as Imperialism.